beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On September 14, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a management contract with the Defendant for “Seoul-si B apartment” (hereinafter “instant contract”), and the specific content are as follows.
Terms of contract: From September 15, 2014 to September 14, 2017, Article 2 (Entrusted Management) (1) Management affairs entrusted by the defendant to the plaintiff are as follows:
1. Affairs of the managing body under the subparagraphs of Article 5 (1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Housing Act and the subparagraphs of Article 25 of the Rules;
2. In addition to the duties prescribed in subparagraph 1, the defendant shall pay to the plaintiff the entrusted management fees of KRW 421,00 (in addition to the duties prescribed in subparagraph 1), which are prescribed as the duties of the managing body by the Housing Act, the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, and the Enforcement Rule.
Article 13 (Cancellation of Contracts) (1) The defendant and the plaintiff may terminate the contract in any of the following cases, and may claim damages for such termination:
2. When the plaintiff entered into a contract by illegal acts, such as offering money and valuables.
B. On July 21, 2015, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of the termination of the instant contract on the ground of the “Article 13(1)2 of the instant contract (the time when the Plaintiff entered into the instant contract by unlawful act, such as providing money and valuables)” and the said notification of termination of the contract reached the Plaintiff on July 22, 2015.
[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, entries in Gap evidence 1 and 7, purport of the whole pleadings]
2. The parties' assertion and judgment
A. 1) The Plaintiff asserts that the Plaintiff is responsible for compensating the Plaintiff for the damages that the Plaintiff sustained as a result of the termination of the instant contract without any justifiable reason. 2) The Defendant asserts that the Defendant’s termination of the instant contract on the grounds of the Plaintiff’s wrongful act of offering money and valuables is lawful.
B. On September 14, 2014, the date of entering into the instant contract, the Plaintiff delivered KRW 6,000,000 to C, who was the Defendant’s representative, as of September 14, 2014. (2) The Plaintiff is the Defendant on July 3, 2015.